As you can imagine the Twitterverse is full of tweets about two things today: Halloween and the arrests resulting from the Mueller investigation. I predicted a couple of days ago that Paul Manafort would be the first arrest. Yesterday, though I didn’t say it anywhere publicly, I began to think there would be a second person. I had no idea who it would be though.

Now Manafort and the second person, who we now know is Rick Gates, have both pleaded Not Guilty. Manafort’s bail is US$10 million and Gates’s is US$5 million.

On Fox News, they’re saying Mueller will have a hard time getting a guilty verdict. Their opinion is it’s easy to get a grand jury in Washington DC to charge Republicans. The legal advisors on CNN though have been saying for some time that Mueller would not bring charges unless he was sure he could get a conviction, and that conviction was safe from appeal.

However, we also have the news that George Papadopolous pleaded guilty earlier this month. I would speculate that means Papadopolous probably has a deal to flip on a bigger fish. He’s described as a “cooperating witness.” Apparently that phrase can mean he was wearing a wire. If that’s the case, it may mean there are a lot more shoes to drop.

If indeed there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, there must be many people in the White House who are very worried. CNNsays:

Watching the developments unfold on the large television screens installed in his private residence, Trump was “seething,” according to a Republican close to the White House.

We’ll just have to wait and see what happens next. Legal processes move slowly, and they seem to move even more slowly when you’re waiting on the outcome.

Political Tweets

As someone who replied to this tweet said, it could also be a Tory, or anyone else who still adheres to the fallacy of trickle-down economics!

Not trying to needle anyone, just trying to offer a badly underrepresented perspective. I assume that lively debate is the point. I assume others participate for similar reasons. Besides, it’s not even a choice, right, so what am I supposed to do?

Offering a different perspective is one thing, but sometimes you carry on ad infinitum when you are simply wrong. You can have your own viewpoint, but not your own facts. We don’t have a problem with the fact that you believe in God for example. The problem comes when you insist that your belief is fact and everyone who doesn’t share it is wrong.

The same with the Ten Commandments. They come from the Bronze Age when the world of the Bible was divided into warring tribes. They were commandments for the Jewish people of the time. It is only modern interpretation that has given them the meaning you apply to them. In our modern society, most are no longer the law. Even those that are, theologians from your own religion have spent centuries debating when they don’t, such as the Just War doctrine.

Translation is a big problem too. Most think of the 5th Commandment as “Thou shall not kill” and that’s even the way it’s written in most places. However, the correct translation is murder, not kill, which puts a whole new meaning on it. Personally, I think a prohibition of all killing is better, but that’s not what the Bible originally said. It also clearly didn’t have a lot to do with reality at the time since there’s a helluva lot of killing in the Bible, most of it by, or ordered by, God himself.

Have you ever lived or even travelled extensively outside of the US? I think a spell in Japan, or any other fairly successful non-Chrisitan country, would serve very well to widen your perspective. But then again, what would I know? I’m just a “dull stranger.”

@HH:I regret giving offense. What I will say on my own behalf is that I don’t believe the host and other guests pull any punches when they state their own opinions in the strongest terms, and strongly condemn those they disagree with or disapprove of. I don’t claim to be right about anything. However, when someone tells me that I’m wrong, I don’t apologize for asking them to provide an argument that holds water.

The premise of the cartoon — the implication that the Jewish and Christian traditions somehow countenance deceit — betrays such a shallow and foolish ignorance that exegetical quibbling over a few verses of scripture is almost beside the point. But here goes.

“It is only modern interpretation that has given [the Ten Commandments] the meaning you apply to them.”

No, the facts don’t bear that out. For one example of pre-modern interpretation, St. Augustine wrote in “De mendacio” ca. 395: “On the other hand, those who say that we must never lie, plead much more strongly, using first the Divine authority, because in the very Decalogue it is written You shall not bear false witness; under which general term it comprises all lying: for whoso utters any thing bears witness to his own mind. But lest any should contend that not every lie is to be called false witness, what will he say to that which is written, The mouth that lies slays the soul: and lest any should suppose that this may be understood with the exception of some liars, let him read in another place, You will destroy all that speak leasing. Whence with His own lips the Lord says, Let your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these comes of evil.”

More importantly, the Gospel itself has Jesus explicitly reject cramped legalistic interpretations of the commandments: “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment.” And of course Jesus goes so far as to say that the “whole law” of Moses and the prophets rests on love.

395 was multiple centuries after the Ten Commandments were written. They were originally just for that tribe, What Jesus said only applied to his small corner of the world, and was for the Jews, not the Gentiles.

You state that God is real. That is where we get pissed off. There is absolutely no proof of that and until you can provide some, God is not real. You just believe He is.

@Steven: Been there, stayed in a Zen monastery and visited Ise, fwiw. Not sure what that has to do with the price of tea, since there’s been little discussion here of Buddhism, Shinto, or the Japanese.

A broader perspective is better than a narrower one, and all of us could do with a little broadening. But in the end there’s no substitute for actually knowing something about the topic at hand.